[Powderworks] Warning : Political drivel content.... Impeach the Pres,
Bruce Robertson
the_oil_fish@yahoo.ca
Wed, 5 Feb 2003 11:44:52 -0500 (EST)
--0-442069785-1044463492=:23057
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Welcome back Joffa! And good it is to read your cyber voice again.
A couple of thoughts on the current thread, albeit from a rank outsider. The American gov't appears to be, as usual, in a no win situation. I agree that the best choice would be to just keep the inspectors there indefinitely. Much cheaper than war in every respect. As a typical Canadian, I'm neither for a war nor against it, and congratulating myself for it. (just ask our PM.) But I think we'd all have something to celebrate if Saddam is taken out, especially the poor people living on their knees, with his great bloody "boot stamping on their faces," to borrow from Orwell. America is about the only power big enough to do it. The fact that it might be very good for them economically doesn't alter the fact that offing a cruel dictator is generally a good thing to do. Even the fact that they've installed one or two in the past doesn't change the ethics of the act. ah, If only it were that simple eh. After all:
Who hands out equal rights, who starts and ends that fight?
Is it my place? Our place? Hmmm.....
Something else Jeff said about rootedness caught my eye, simply because it's so ironic. Hearing the West described as 'deeply rooted in a way of seeing' made me think of how rootless we actually are, and consequently how difficult (perhaps impossible) it will be to make decisions or reach concensus. Manifest destiny? Unbloodylikely. Anyway, we (westerners) are the people who live everywhere and nowhere, and we seek to impose - for better or worse - our homelessness and abstracted society on everyone. I came across this little poem by a retired teacher/practising farmer from the U of Kansas last week, and it seemed to resonate with what the Oils stand for:
All my dawns cross the horizon,
and rise from underfoot.
What I stand for,
Is what I stand on. ~ (Wendell Berry)
Sorry, this has nothing to do with what the original post was about, just a bit of mid-day rambling. Peace to all, as we seek to dwell in place...
bruce in calgary
PS: Speaking of impeaching your president....can't we work out some kind of swap? I'll trade you our teflon-suited-bumbler-of-both-official-languages for your Texan any day. He looks great in a white hat... :)
Jeff McLean <jeffm@jeack.com.au> wrote:Hi Everyone,
Good to "see" you all again.
I have just returned from a wonderful cycling stint in West Africa where we
have shot a documentary on cycling, and the misplaced "fear" we all have of
some of these places (and worse, of the fear we have of the people).
And what do I return to? The "bleedin' demise" of the Oils!
Still, I can't say I'm pissed off. Inconsolably sad would come close.
So, I was looking for an entry point to hop back on the list, and, thanks
Craig, you provided a nice one.
I would just suggest that you may want to take a peek at Bowling for Columbine
- there is an (all too short) piece in the middle of the film talking about
"our" completely rooted way that the West has handled world affairs in the
past, and specifically in the middle east and Asia.
So back to your cited reason for what is unfortunately our upcoming action in
Iraq. Please note that I am sure (and I'm not taking the piss) that you have
many other reasons for thinking war is a good thing in this instance, but I
imagine they have far more credit than the one cited.
If we're talking about numbers of civilian dead (and thank God we aren't) then
Iraq's 500,000 dead against 3,000 in the WTC surely gives them plenty of reason
to have nuked all western nations out of existence. These dead occured both
directly and indirectly as a result of the weekly bomibing sorties over Iraq
since 1991, which we have rarely heard about, and the sanctions imposed on the
nation. The fact that Saddam is a dictator has nothing to do with our attack.
The Shah in Iran, and Pinochet in Argentina name just two that come to mind at
the moment. They are two dictators that were installed in countries, thus
overthrowing a threat to Western economic dominance. Oh, and by the way, the
source of that 500,000 figure and the weekly sorties is the UN; a body that we
know is marjority funded by the U.S. (one of the many good things the States
do.) This makes me think that it must be a MIGHTY sticking point in the UN
that this information has been so freely released. .
So, back to the point, here we are, going in AGAIN, and openly contemplating
using our own Nuclear Warheads (God Bless the side of the righteous and
free!!!) on "weapons installations" in Iraq.
Hellllloooooooooo 1945!
Do I hear a bit of bracchiating going on here??? Surely a simple but poignant
question to ask here is why can't we send the inspectors into these locations
rather than bombing them? Iraq HAS NOT stopped ANY inspectors going to any
location that they have requested. Mr Blix will tell you that. Ex-head
inspector Mr Butler will also tell us that.
I remain certain that an agenda is driving the major news networks in the
States, as many of you do, and that this agenda is dictated by the various
vested interests currently in power. When anyone tells us anythiing, the first
thing we should be looking for is vested interests that the informer may have.
I have a good friend in Europe that covers war stories and has just returned
from covering issues in Israel. I am certain that atrocities are being
committed on both sides, and that some of the Palestinians are no angels. But
what pisses me off is that any pro-Palestinian stories or stories with an anti
-Israel element will NOT be told. My friend has been told that this is the
sort of story that will not be newsworthy - it is not on the agenda of the
moment. And they are the words that were used.
Our reasons for war are oil only in this instance. All other reasons I have
heard are rhetoric, ill-conceived, and based on a very shaky foundation of
mistruths and fear-propagation.
Who's gonna save me?
Who's gonna save me?
I pray that sense and reason brings us in...
There, that's 2.3% of what I wanted to say off my mind...
Joffa.
Craig Jacobson wrote:
> Eel Bonjack wrote:
>
> >If you disagree with this, then you can just ignore me
> >here.
> >otherwise, I think we got to make a stand here.
> >because I can't go on, living like this, watching
> >pictures of the world as they pass me by.....
> >
> >http://www.votetoimpeach.org
> >
> I couldn't resist taking a look at this website. Not because there
> aren't legitimate reasons to oppose the possibility of conflict in Iraq
> - there are numerous reasons - but because those who are most vocal in
> opposition never seem to come up with them.
>
> The first of the "articles of impeachment" put forth by Ramsey Clark
> refers to a "pre-emptive" war in Afghanistan. I hate to break the news,
> but in lower Manhattan, across the street from where I once went to
> school, there used to be these two really tall buildings. Three
> thousand people were brutally murdered there. The military action in
> Afghanistan by the U.S. and its allies was anything but "pre-emptive".
>
> The remaining "articles" were equally filled with distortions and untruths.
>
> So, whatever each person's position may be, they should take care to
> back it up with facts and reasoned arguments rather than the
> aforementioned drivel.
>
> Back to our regular scheduled discussion on Euro Capricornia...
>
> - CAJ
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powderworks mailing list
> Powderworks@cs.colorado.edu
> http://www.cs.colorado.edu/mailman/listinfo/powderworks
_______________________________________________
Powderworks mailing list
Powderworks@cs.colorado.edu
http://www.cs.colorado.edu/mailman/listinfo/powderworks
---------------------------------
Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals
--0-442069785-1044463492=:23057
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<P>Welcome back Joffa! And good it is to read your cyber voice again.
<P>A couple of thoughts on the current thread, albeit from a rank outsider. The American gov't appears to be, as usual, in a no win situation. I agree that the best choice would be to just keep the inspectors there indefinitely. Much cheaper than war in every respect. As a typical Canadian, I'm neither for a war nor against it, and congratulating myself for it. (just ask our PM.) But I think we'd all have something to celebrate if Saddam is taken out, especially the poor people living on their knees, with his great bloody "boot stamping on their faces," to borrow from Orwell. America is about the only power big enough to do it. The fact that it might be very good for them economically doesn't alter the fact that offing a cruel dictator is generally a good thing to do. Even the fact that they've installed one or two in the past doesn't change the ethics of the act. ah, If only it were that simple eh. After all:
<P><STRONG>Who hands out equal rights, who starts and ends that fight?<BR></STRONG>
<P> Is it my place? Our place? Hmmm.....
<P>Something else Jeff said about rootedness caught my eye, simply because it's so ironic. Hearing the West described as 'deeply rooted in a way of seeing' made me think of how rootless we actually are, and consequently how difficult (perhaps impossible) it will be to make decisions or reach concensus. Manifest destiny? Unbloodylikely. Anyway, we (westerners) are the people who live everywhere and nowhere, and we seek to impose - for better or worse - our homelessness and abstracted society on everyone. I came across this little poem by a retired teacher/practising farmer from the U of Kansas last week, and it seemed to resonate with what the Oils stand for:
<P>All my dawns cross the horizon,<BR>and rise from underfoot.<BR>What I stand for,<BR>Is what I stand on. ~ (Wendell Berry)</P>
<P>Sorry, this has nothing to do with what the original post was about, just a bit of mid-day rambling. Peace to all, as we seek to dwell in place...</P>
<P>bruce in calgary</P>
<P>PS: Speaking of impeaching your president....can't we work out some kind of swap? I'll trade you our teflon-suited-bumbler-of-both-official-languages for your Texan any day. He looks great in a white hat... :)</P>
<P> <B><I>Jeff McLean <jeffm@jeack.com.au></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Hi Everyone,<BR><BR>Good to "see" you all again.<BR><BR>I have just returned from a wonderful cycling stint in West Africa where we<BR>have shot a documentary on cycling, and the misplaced "fear" we all have of<BR>some of these places (and worse, of the fear we have of the people).<BR><BR>And what do I return to? The "bleedin' demise" of the Oils!<BR><BR>Still, I can't say I'm pissed off. Inconsolably sad would come close.<BR><BR>So, I was looking for an entry point to hop back on the list, and, thanks<BR>Craig, you provided a nice one.<BR><BR>I would just suggest that you may want to take a peek at Bowling for Columbine<BR>- there is an (all too short) piece in the middle of the film talking about<BR>"our" completely rooted way that the West has handled world affairs in the<BR>past, and specifically in the middle east and Asia.<BR><BR>So back to your cited reason for what is unfortunately our upcoming action in<BR>Iraq. Please note that I am sure (and I'm not taking the piss) that you have<BR>many other reasons for thinking war is a good thing in this instance, but I<BR>imagine they have far more credit than the one cited.<BR><BR>If we're talking about numbers of civilian dead (and thank God we aren't) then<BR>Iraq's 500,000 dead against 3,000 in the WTC surely gives them plenty of reason<BR>to have nuked all western nations out of existence. These dead occured both<BR>directly and indirectly as a result of the weekly bomibing sorties over Iraq<BR>since 1991, which we have rarely heard about, and the sanctions imposed on the<BR>nation. The fact that Saddam is a dictator has nothing to do with our attack.<BR>The Shah in Iran, and Pinochet in Argentina name just two that come to mind at<BR>the moment. They are two dictators that were installed in countries, thus<BR>overthrowing a threat to Western economic dominance. Oh, and by the way, the<BR>source of that 500,000 figure and the weekly sorties is the UN; a body that we<BR>kn
ow is marjority funded by the U.S. (one of the many good things the States<BR>do.) This makes me think that it must be a MIGHTY sticking point in the UN<BR>that this information has been so freely released. .<BR><BR>So, back to the point, here we are, going in AGAIN, and openly contemplating<BR>using our own Nuclear Warheads (God Bless the side of the righteous and<BR>free!!!) on "weapons installations" in Iraq.<BR><BR>Hellllloooooooooo 1945!<BR><BR>Do I hear a bit of bracchiating going on here??? Surely a simple but poignant<BR>question to ask here is why can't we send the inspectors into these locations<BR>rather than bombing them? Iraq HAS NOT stopped ANY inspectors going to any<BR>location that they have requested. Mr Blix will tell you that. Ex-head<BR>inspector Mr Butler will also tell us that.<BR><BR>I remain certain that an agenda is driving the major news networks in the<BR>States, as many of you do, and that this agenda is dictated by the various<BR>vested interests currently in power. When anyone tells us anythiing, the first<BR>thing we should be looking for is vested interests that the informer may have.<BR>I have a good friend in Europe that covers war stories and has just returned<BR>from covering issues in Israel. I am certain that atrocities are being<BR>committed on both sides, and that some of the Palestinians are no angels. But<BR>what pisses me off is that any pro-Palestinian stories or stories with an anti<BR>-Israel element will NOT be told. My friend has been told that this is the<BR>sort of story that will not be newsworthy - it is not on the agenda of the<BR>moment. And they are the words that were used.<BR><BR>Our reasons for war are oil only in this instance. All other reasons I have<BR>heard are rhetoric, ill-conceived, and based on a very shaky foundation of<BR>mistruths and fear-propagation.<BR><BR>Who's gonna save me?<BR>Who's gonna save me?<BR>I pray that sense and reason brings us in...<BR><BR>There, that's 2.3% of what I wanted to say off my mind...<BR><BR>Joffa.<BR><BR>Craig J
acobson wrote:<BR><BR>> Eel Bonjack wrote:<BR>><BR>> >If you disagree with this, then you can just ignore me<BR>> >here.<BR>> >otherwise, I think we got to make a stand here.<BR>> >because I can't go on, living like this, watching<BR>> >pictures of the world as they pass me by.....<BR>> ><BR>> >http://www.votetoimpeach.org<BR>> ><BR>> I couldn't resist taking a look at this website. Not because there<BR>> aren't legitimate reasons to oppose the possibility of conflict in Iraq<BR>> - there are numerous reasons - but because those who are most vocal in<BR>> opposition never seem to come up with them.<BR>><BR>> The first of the "articles of impeachment" put forth by Ramsey Clark<BR>> refers to a "pre-emptive" war in Afghanistan. I hate to break the news,<BR>> but in lower Manhattan, across the street from where I once went to<BR>> school, there used to be these two really tall buildings. Three<BR>> thousand people were brutally murdered there. The military action in<BR>> Afghanistan by the U.S. and its allies was anything but "pre-emptive".<BR>><BR>> The remaining "articles" were equally filled with distortions and untruths.<BR>><BR>> So, whatever each person's position may be, they should take care to<BR>> back it up with facts and reasoned arguments rather than the<BR>> aforementioned drivel.<BR>><BR>> Back to our regular scheduled discussion on Euro Capricornia...<BR>><BR>> - CAJ<BR>><BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Powderworks mailing list<BR>> Powderworks@cs.colorado.edu<BR>> http://www.cs.colorado.edu/mailman/listinfo/powderworks<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Powderworks mailing list<BR>Powderworks@cs.colorado.edu<BR>http://www.cs.colorado.edu/mailman/listinfo/powderworks</BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1>Post your free ad now! <a href="http://ca.personals.yahoo.com/"><b>Yahoo! Canada Personals</b></a><br>
--0-442069785-1044463492=:23057--